Re: You Ain't Seen Nuthin' Yet

The world you describe seems to have very few people being productive and supporting everyone else.

I wouldn't characterize it as people being productive, people will own machines and machines will do the work. Not sure how people will buy the stuff the machines make without income.

What's the alternative if machines displace 50% of the workforce in the next few decades?

People can adapt or try to, learn new skills, new professions, but they have to pay the bills while they do.

The drive to reduce the cost of labor and automation is not going to stop.

Another possibility is machines greatly reduce the cost of goods and services.

What do that do to the value of what human labor is still around?

What will labor be worth if 50% of the workforce doesn't have a job?

Still people have to pay the bills.

Get rid of the people ?

On a scale of 1 to 10 most people are around 5, they're average, what will average people do? Not smart enough to design robots, they don't own land to farm, no new world to get on a ship and sail to, and machines can do most of the jobs they used to do, faster, cheaper, better, forever.

Family planning or just keep trying to bring back coal and man made climate change will get rid of a lot of the surplus population.

It does appear the Republican Path Forward is a form of genocide by neglect. Neglect pollution control, kill more people. Neglect climate change, kill more people. Neglect health care, kill more people. They even have come up with a new victim - instead of basing their genocide on race, they base it on INCOME, so only the poor will die. This seems to be okay with the GOPerBase, mostly because they haven't noticed the plan also calls for moving the middle class down to "poor" as rapidly as possible.

Re: You Ain't Seen Nuthin' Yet

The world you describe seems to have very few people being productive and supporting everyone else.

I wouldn't characterize it as people being productive, people will own machines and machines will do the work. Not sure how people will buy the stuff the machines make without income.

What's the alternative if machines displace 50% of the workforce in the next few decades?

People can adapt or try to, learn new skills, new professions, but they have to pay the bills while they do.

The drive to reduce the cost of labor and automation is not going to stop.

Another possibility is machines greatly reduce the cost of goods and services.

What do that do to the value of what human labor is still around?

What will labor be worth if 50% of the workforce doesn't have a job?

Still people have to pay the bills.

Get rid of the people ?

On a scale of 1 to 10 most people are around 5, they're average, what will average people do? Not smart enough to design robots, they don't own land to farm, no new world to get on a ship and sail to, and machines can do most of the jobs they used to do, faster, cheaper, better, forever.

Family planning or just keep trying to bring back coal and man made climate change will get rid of a lot of the surplus population.

Re: You Ain't Seen Nuthin' Yet

If taxes aren't the answer, the opposite is also true, and tax breaks aren't the answer either. Someone should have clued Trump and Pence in before looking like fools when they gave away the castle to Carrier, and then Carrier made its move to eliminate all the jobs their tax incentives were supposed to retain.

Re: You Ain't Seen Nuthin' Yet

What you have here are two different problems. 1. Manufacturing jobs of to day going away just like they always do. This has been going on for at least 200 years. 2. Income inequality. Every time this happens the middle class on down is hurt.

You have to solve both problems and you can not combine them. Problem one has always had a starter as new things and ways are invented to make things. That is already happening we just have to encourage it not try and stop it. The Reb. have always tried the latter and it never worked. You want the cost of manufacturing to be about the same all over the world. Unions for all helps as then it is harder to take advantage of the people who become the workers. Problem 2 has been with us for years now. You can not have the difference between top and bottom in earnings and have a healthy economy. Teddy Roosevelt new this and was a trust buster as this was one of the first attempts to control it. Unions once again serve a really useful purpose as they give the workers a voice in what the difference is. The Reb. have always been for what is happening today by their policies. The Ben and Jerry rule would help a lot if it were put into law, and minimum wage helps.

You have missed the point. The problem isn't fair treatment of workers, it is the lack of need for workers. And Rebs. are not a factor - only reality is.

No I am on point. When you understand economics you know these are 2 different problems with 2 different answers. When both get the correct answer you solve them, when you try to solve both together using the same answer you solve nothing, and our current situation proves that. The far right have never done anything to solve either of these problems. As I have said before the far right have never helped the average person with anything.

If there are very few workers needed due to an advancing technology, the treatment of the few workers is not a factor for the vast majority of people.

This is not a political issue, it is a technology one so the usual "far right" comments are pointless.

I have given you the approach to solve these 2 problems, but the far right do not understand any of this and just post different words wich are meaningless. With that in mind we have now reached that point. You know the drill.

Again - This is not a political issue, it is a technology one so the usual "far right" comments are pointless.

It is not a case of manufacturing jobs going away. It is a case of jobs going away.

It is not a case of income inequality. It is a case of income nonexistence.

Re: You Ain't Seen Nuthin' Yet

What you have here are two different problems. 1. Manufacturing jobs of to day going away just like they always do. This has been going on for at least 200 years. 2. Income inequality. Every time this happens the middle class on down is hurt.

You have to solve both problems and you can not combine them. Problem one has always had a starter as new things and ways are invented to make things. That is already happening we just have to encourage it not try and stop it. The Reb. have always tried the latter and it never worked. You want the cost of manufacturing to be about the same all over the world. Unions for all helps as then it is harder to take advantage of the people who become the workers. Problem 2 has been with us for years now. You can not have the difference between top and bottom in earnings and have a healthy economy. Teddy Roosevelt new this and was a trust buster as this was one of the first attempts to control it. Unions once again serve a really useful purpose as they give the workers a voice in what the difference is. The Reb. have always been for what is happening today by their policies. The Ben and Jerry rule would help a lot if it were put into law, and minimum wage helps.

You have missed the point. The problem isn't fair treatment of workers, it is the lack of need for workers. And Rebs. are not a factor - only reality is.

No I am on point. When you understand economics you know these are 2 different problems with 2 different answers. When both get the correct answer you solve them, when you try to solve both together using the same answer you solve nothing, and our current situation proves that. The far right have never done anything to solve either of these problems. As I have said before the far right have never helped the average person with anything.

If there are very few workers needed due to an advancing technology, the treatment of the few workers is not a factor for the vast majority of people.

This is not a political issue, it is a technology one so the usual "far right" comments are pointless.

I have given you the approach to solve these 2 problems, but the far right do not understand any of this and just post different words wich are meaningless. With that in mind we have now reached that point. You know the drill.

Re: You Ain't Seen Nuthin' Yet

I've seen this coming since 30 years ago. Automation and technology will, I thought, kill jobs. I'm surprised it has taken this long. Computers also have made it possible for corporations to transfer work to workers in other countries.

Re: You Ain't Seen Nuthin' Yet

For those that see all the problems of workers solvable by merely taxing the accomplished, better think again - it's a new world out there continually evolving and the plants of the '50s are not coming back.

Being a plumber I made an observation about thirty five years ago, a recession wasn't considered a recession until white collar workers lost jobs.

A spin off of that observation is automation, off shoring, and AI aren't a problem until white collar types starting losing jobs.

Guess what is happening, and will continue to happen?

Buy books, go to school, get good grades, do OK on a SAT, get though college, do everything right, and there still might not be a good job for you, a job working in a bookstore maybe, if anyone buys books anymore.

It is a new world out there, and the old one is not coming back, we're not bringing back coal.

One thing will still be true though, the drive to reduce the cost of labor.

Time to think about universal healthcare and a guaranteed minimum income IMO.

If machines are going to do all the work, the people who own those machines must pay more in taxes.

Start thinking about opening more family planning clinics, not closing them.

Put climate change problems on top of world wide automation and AI and people are going to need a strong social safety net.

I'ts good you're finally starting to see the light, keep working on it, you might get there some day.

The guaranteed minimum income has always been an idea with fascination for me. The ultimate safety net with none of the overhead our current welfare systems generate. If you want to go to school or work on your art or whatever, you simply must reduce your standard of living to the point you can support yourself until your investment in the future pays off (or doesn't). If you are lazy enough not to aspire to more than the guaranteed minimum, it takes the laziest people out of the job market making America more competitive.

Frankly, I would rather some other country show it can be successful first as they have with government run health care, retirements, day care, elder care, and so on.

Re: You Ain't Seen Nuthin' Yet

For those that see all the problems of workers solvable by merely taxing the accomplished, better think again - it's a new world out there continually evolving and the plants of the '50s are not coming back.

Being a plumber I made an observation about thirty five years ago, a recession wasn't considered a recession until white collar workers lost jobs.

A spin off of that observation is automation, off shoring, and AI aren't a problem until white collar types starting losing jobs.

Guess what is happening, and will continue to happen?

Buy books, go to school, get good grades, do OK on a SAT, get though college, do everything right, and there still might not be a good job for you, a job working in a bookstore maybe, if anyone buys books anymore.

It is a new world out there, and the old one is not coming back, we're not bringing back coal.

One thing will still be true though, the drive to reduce the cost of labor.

Time to think about universal healthcare and a guaranteed minimum income IMO.

If machines are going to do all the work, the people who own those machines must pay more in taxes.

Start thinking about opening more family planning clinics, not closing them.

Put climate change problems on top of world wide automation and AI and people are going to need a strong social safety net.

I'ts good you're finally starting to see the light, keep working on it, you might get there some day.

The world you describe seems to have very few people being productive and supporting everyone else. You may be right but it does seem unfair to the working few.

Re: You Ain't Seen Nuthin' Yet

What you have here are two different problems. 1. Manufacturing jobs of to day going away just like they always do. This has been going on for at least 200 years. 2. Income inequality. Every time this happens the middle class on down is hurt.

You have to solve both problems and you can not combine them. Problem one has always had a starter as new things and ways are invented to make things. That is already happening we just have to encourage it not try and stop it. The Reb. have always tried the latter and it never worked. You want the cost of manufacturing to be about the same all over the world. Unions for all helps as then it is harder to take advantage of the people who become the workers. Problem 2 has been with us for years now. You can not have the difference between top and bottom in earnings and have a healthy economy. Teddy Roosevelt new this and was a trust buster as this was one of the first attempts to control it. Unions once again serve a really useful purpose as they give the workers a voice in what the difference is. The Reb. have always been for what is happening today by their policies. The Ben and Jerry rule would help a lot if it were put into law, and minimum wage helps.

You have missed the point. The problem isn't fair treatment of workers, it is the lack of need for workers. And Rebs. are not a factor - only reality is.

No I am on point. When you understand economics you know these are 2 different problems with 2 different answers. When both get the correct answer you solve them, when you try to solve both together using the same answer you solve nothing, and our current situation proves that. The far right have never done anything to solve either of these problems. As I have said before the far right have never helped the average person with anything.

If there are very few workers needed due to an advancing technology, the treatment of the few workers is not a factor for the vast majority of people.

This is not a political issue, it is a technology one so the usual "far right" comments are pointless.